Intel Arc A380E x2 vs NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data shows a complete mismatch in benchmark presence between these two accelerators. The Intel Arc A380E x2 has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, while the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC posts a Geekbench OpenCL score of 369,831. This places the B300 in the 100th percentile of all GPUs tracked, a perfect score that reflects its position at the very top of the performance hierarchy.

Against its nearest recorded rivals, the B300 shows decisive leads. It sits 7% ahead of the NVIDIA B200, which scored 345,482. The gap widens to 10.4% over the NVIDIA H200 NVL at 334,891, and reaches 16.3% over the AMD Instinct MI300X at 317,994. The largest margin in the recorded comparison set is against the NVIDIA L40S, where the B300 leads by 25% (295,763 for the L40S). These deltas confirm that the B300 does not merely edge out its competition; it clears each rival by a substantial margin, and the margin grows as the rival's position in the stack falls.

The Intel Arc A380E x2, by contrast, carries a 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of zero. That percentile figure indicates a mid-pack positioning, but the absence of any recorded benchmark data makes direct numerical comparison impossible. The database records no head-to-head benchmarks between these two units, no wins for either side, and no average score for the Intel product. What can be stated from the recorded data is that the NVIDIA part delivers a score that places it in the top percentile, while the Intel part's percentile rank of 50 suggests a fundamentally different performance class.

Architecture Differences

The two accelerators come from opposite ends of the hardware spectrum. The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses the DG2-128 chip, built on the Xe-HPG architecture, and belongs to the Alchemist generation (Arc 3). It is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.9 million per mm². The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC uses the GB110 chip, based on the Blackwell Ultra architecture, and belongs to the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation. It is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with 208,000 million transistors on a 1,628 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 127.8 million per mm².

The transistor counts differ by a factor of roughly 29, and the die area by more than a factor of ten. The B300's density advantage, about 2.8 times that of the Intel part, reflects the newer process node and the much larger design. Clock speeds tell a nuanced story: the Intel part has a base and boost clock of 2000 MHz, while the B300 has a base clock of 1665 MHz and a boost clock of 2032 MHz. The B300 boosts slightly higher than the Intel part, but its base clock is considerably lower. Memory clocks differ as well, with the Intel part running at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective) and the B300 at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective). The effective data rate is nearly double on the Intel part, though the B300's HBM3e memory operates with a fundamentally different interface.

Memory subsystems are in different leagues. The Intel Arc A380E x2 carries 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, delivering 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC carries 288 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. That is a 44-fold difference in capacity and a roughly 44-fold difference in bandwidth. The bus width difference, 96 bits versus 8192 bits, explains the bandwidth gulf despite the Intel part's faster effective memory clock.

Compute resources are equally lopsided. The Intel part has 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, along with 8 ray tracing cores. The B300 has 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, with 592 tensor cores. The B300 has no listed ray tracing cores in the database, while the Intel part has no listed tensor cores. The B300's shading unit count is over 18 times that of the Intel part. Pixel rate favors Intel at 64.00 GPixel/s versus 48.77 GPixel/s for the B300, a result of the Intel part's higher clock and smaller ROP count being offset by the B300's lower ROP count. Texture rate strongly favors the B300 at 1,202.9 GTexel/s versus 128.0 GTexel/s for Intel.

FP32 compute shows the B300 at 76.99 TFLOPS versus 4.096 TFLOPS for the Intel part, a difference of roughly 18.8 times. FP16 tells a different architectural story: the Intel part achieves 8.192 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32, while the B300 achieves 76.99 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. The B300's FP16 throughput equals its FP32 throughput, indicating a design where FP16 does not benefit from a rate increase, whereas the Intel part doubles its throughput when moving to FP16.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A380E x2 wins in a few specific, narrow categories. Its pixel rate of 64.00 GPixel/s exceeds the B300's 48.77 GPixel/s, meaning it can fill more pixels per second under certain conditions. Its effective memory clock of 15.5 Gbps is nearly twice the B300's 8 Gbps. Its display outputs, 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0, contrast sharply with the B300's complete lack of display outputs. The Intel part is a single-slot card with a 130 W TDP, while the B300 is an SXM module with a 1100 W TDP. The Intel part uses a single 6-pin power connector and suggests a 300 W power supply, versus the B300's suggested 1500 W supply. The Intel part is 265 mm long, 127 mm high, and 20 mm wide, while the B300 has no recorded dimensions.

The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC wins everywhere that matters for compute workloads. Its FP32 throughput of 76.99 TFLOPS is nearly 19 times that of the Intel part. Its FP16 throughput of 76.99 TFLOPS is over 9 times the Intel part's 8.192 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 1,202.9 GTexel/s is over 9 times the Intel part's 128.0 GTexel/s. Its memory capacity of 288 GB is 48 times the Intel part's 6 GB. Its memory bandwidth of 8.19 TB/s is roughly 44 times the Intel part's 186.0 GB/s. Its shading unit count of 18,944 is over 18 times the Intel part's 1,024. Its tensor core count of 592, with no corresponding count on the Intel part, indicates a designed-for-AI compute capability that the Intel product does not match in the recorded specifications.

The B300 also holds advantages in interface and status. It uses PCIe 6.0 x16, while the Intel part uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The B300 is marked as Active in production status, while the Intel part is End-of-life. The B300 was released on 2025-09-10, while the Intel part was released on 2024-03-31. The B300's predecessor is Server Hopper and its successor is Server Rubin, while the Intel part's predecessor is Xe Graphics and its successor is Battlemage.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC has a Geekbench OpenCL score of 369,831. The Intel Arc A380E x2 has no recorded benchmark scores in the database.

Q: How does the B300 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The B300 is 7% ahead of the NVIDIA B200 (345,482), 10.4% ahead of the NVIDIA H200 NVL (334,891), 16.3% ahead of the AMD Instinct MI300X (317,994), and 25% ahead of the NVIDIA L40S (295,763).

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 186.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC has 288 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has display outputs?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 has 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC has no display outputs.

Q: What are the TDP requirements?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 has a TDP of 130 W with a suggested power supply of 300 W. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC has a TDP of 1100 W with a suggested power supply of 1500 W.

Q: Which GPU supports which PCIe interface?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC uses PCIe 6.0 x16.

Q: What is the production status of each?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 is marked as End-of-life. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC is marked as Active.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward conclusion: these are not competing products in any meaningful sense. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC is a server accelerator designed for maximum compute throughput, evidenced by its 76.99 TFLOPS FP32, 288 GB HBM3e memory, and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. Its 100th percentile ranking and 369,831 OpenCL score place it at the top of the database. The Intel Arc A380E x2 is a single-slot graphics card with display outputs, a 130 W TDP, and a 50th percentile ranking, with no recorded benchmark scores.

A user requiring display output would select the Intel part, as it offers 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 while the B300 offers none. A user requiring compute density, memory capacity, or AI-oriented tensor cores would select the B300, which dominates in every compute metric recorded. The B300's tensor core count of 592, absent on the Intel part, indicates a design target of machine learning workloads. The Intel part's ray tracing cores, 8 of them, indicate a graphics-oriented design target.

The production statuses reinforce this split. The Intel part is End-of-life, while the B300 is Active and newer by roughly 17 months based on release dates. The B300's successor, Server Rubin, is already listed, while the Intel part's successor, Battlemage, is also listed. Both products are at different points in their lifecycles, with the B300 clearly positioned as the current-generation compute workhorse.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc A380E x2 | NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC |

|---------------|-------------------|---------------------|

| Chip | DG2-128 | GB110 |

| Architecture | Xe-HPG | Blackwell Ultra |

| Generation | Alchemist (Arc 3) | Server Blackwell (Bxx) |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 7,200 million | 208,000 million |

| Die Size | 157 mm² | 1,628 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 45.9M / mm² | 127.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2000 MHz | 1665 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2000 MHz | 2032 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective) | 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 288 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | HBM3e |

| Memory Bus Width | 96 bit | 8192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 186.0 GB/s | 8.19 TB/s |

| Shading Units | 1,024 | 18,944 |

| TMUs | 64 | 592 |

| ROPs | 32 | 24 |

| RT Cores | 8 | None listed |

| Tensor Cores | None listed | 592 |

| Pixel Rate | 64.00 GPixel/s | 48.77 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 128.0 GTexel/s | 1,202.9 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.096 TFLOPS | 76.99 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1) | 76.99 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 130 W | 1100 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | SXM Module |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | None listed |

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | 1500 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 6.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 | No outputs |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | N/A |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | N/A |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | N/A |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2024-03-31 | 2025-09-10 |

| Predecessor | Xe Graphics | Server Hopper |

| Successor | Battlemage | Server Rubin |